Give Up Blog

Wednesday, April 05, 2006

Give Up News

Well, the Blue states are kicking some ass again. Aside from the wonderful actions of NYAG Eliot Spitzer, Massachusetts is showing the country it's a real Blue state by offering universal health care. While all the Red states are failing their citizens miserably (probably because Bush tax cuts are actively enriching multimillionaires), Massachusetts is actually extending services to its citizens.

Go Massachusetts, the bluest of the Blue states. Even if they have a stinking Republican governor like New York, California or Maryland (notice in all four of these states the Republican governors are widely seen as ineffective failures obstructing effective legislation by Democrats).

Second, consider these two important news stories. One, I can walk on water when it freezes too, and bug extermination should not be attempted in the nude.

Wait, let's make that three news stories of importance. Another Bush administration employee is going to jail. This time, it's the DHS press secretary getting nailed for child molestation. That might not be as high profile as Claude Allen, but still, a pedophile? The worst guy in the Clinton administration accepted Superbowl tickets. These Republicans definitely have us beat. They've got crime covered from shoplifting, to pedophilia, to conspiracy, to fraud, to bribery, to money laundering, to *ahem* war crimes. Man, I miss Clin-ton.

**Update** Read this WaPo article on Massachusetts new health insurance scheme. It's amazing. They're actually requiring their citizens to purchase health care (with a progressive system to protect those below the poverty line). They've changed health insurance into a system like car insurance. I think it's kind of genius!

"We insist that everybody who drives a car has insurance," Romney said in an interview. "And cars are a lot less expensive than people."
...
What resulted is a proposal that health-care experts say is unlike any other in the country. What to do about the 45 million Americans without health insurance has flummoxed both the Bush administration, whose proposal for "health savings accounts" fizzled, and that of Bill Clinton, whose broad plan for health-care changes fell flat.

On the state level, Hawaii and Maine have programs that seek to offer near-universal access to health insurance, and Illinois last year approved a subsidy plan that will widely increase coverage for needy children.

But no state, experts say, has taken the step of making health insurance coverage a legal requirement. The idea was applauded by Uwe E. Reinhardt, a professor of economics and public affairs at Princeton University, who said that he has long believed that the American system of allowing uninsured patients to receive care at the government's expense was nothing more than "freedom to mooch."

"Massachusetts is the first state in America to reach full adulthood," said Reinhardt, noting that the new measure is a move toward personal responsibility. "The rest of America is still in adolescence."

Holy crap! I agree, this is a move towards personal responsibility, just like the right-wingers always claim they're for, but wait until they hear about this shit! They're going to go crazy.

2 Comments:

Anonymous said...

Um, so they're replacing a system where low-income individuals had their health care paid for by the government to one where they have their health insurance paid for by the government. So, what's the difference?*

*Aside from hurting people like me - self-employed with a low, variable income, meaning I'd only qualify for such assistance every other year or so, requiring me to pay for coverage I can't afford the rest of the time.

11:08 PM, April 05, 2006

Rev. Dr. said...

Well, if you look at the structure of the deal it does two things.

One, it creates a progressive insurance system, like the income tax, where people below the poverty line pay little or nothing, and between the poverty line and 3x the poverty line you can get subsidized insurance. So, you can't complain that you're being harmed by having to get insurance when you can obtain it from the government, if you make less than 45k, for less than 200-250 bucks a month. So, at the top end of the subsidized income, 45k, you might pay a 200-250 a month premium (probably that high because it's also considering covering spouses and children of a head-of-household), since it's progressive, at lower incomes between 15-30k you will pay much less.

Two, since everybody is forced to pay in, it essentially acts as a tax increase to force people to start paying for their health coverage. The assumption is the people with no coverage are all poor and can't afford it. This is not the case, young people especially go without health insurance even though they can often afford it. This will have the effect of not only decreasing the costs on the government of covering the uninsured, but will allow them to create an interest-bearing trust, just like insurance companies do, to help cover the costs of health care for the poor rather than just paying the bills as they come in. There's a big difference between paying for shit out of pocket, and having people insured.

Besides, that's just what's being offered by the government. You could also just get cheap, but shitty, health insurance if you're too cheap to do what is socially responsible.

Boo hoo.

9:10 AM, April 06, 2006